Re: Linux 2.6.29-rc6

[Jesper Krogh]

john stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 07:04 +0100, Jesper Krogh wrote:
> > john stultz wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 10:53 +0100, Jesper Krogh wrote:
> > > > john stultz wrote:
> > > > > Ok, so it seems ntp hasn't really had a chance to settle down, its only
> > > > > made a 10ppm adjustment so far. NTPd will stop corrections at ~
> > > > > +/-500ppm, so you're not at that bound yet, where things would be really
> > > > > broken.
> > > > >
> > > > > If the affected kernel isn't resetting in the logs anymore, I'd be
> > > > > interested in what the new ppm value is.
> > > > After 20 hours.. its still resetting.
> > > > Mar  2 10:43:24 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.12, stratum 4
> > > > Mar  2 10:50:37 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -1.103654 s
> > > So what's the "ntpdc -c kerninfo" output now?
> > Mar  3 06:41:10 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -0.813957 s
> > Mar  3 06:45:20 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to LOCAL(0), stratum 13
> > Mar  3 06:45:36 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.12, stratum 4
> > Mar  3 06:51:57 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.13, stratum 4
> > Mar  3 07:00:29 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -0.783390 s
> > jk@quad12:~$ ntpdc -c kerninfo
> > pll offset:           0 s
> > pll frequency:        -28.691 ppm
>
>
> This is baffling. You've only gone from -34.754ppm to -28.691ppm in over
> a day? And you're still not syncing? If the calibration was so bad that
> NTP couldn't sync, I'd expect the freq value to hit +/-500ppm before it
> gave up. This just doesn't follow my expectations.

It's resetting.. without deep knowledge about ntp, doesnt that mean 
"start over again"? I believe it hits +/-500ppm

> Could you provide:
> /usr/sbin/ntpdc -c version

$ ntpdc -c version
ntpdc 4.2.4p4@xxxxxxxx Tue Jan  6 15:51:00 UTC 2009 (1)

> Do you see the same behavior if you drop all but one server (including
> the local clock: 127.127.1.0)? 
>
> You might also add "minpoll 4 maxpoll 4" to the server line to speed up
> testing.

Will try those option while debugging.

> Actually, if you could, I'd be interested if you could send your
> ntp.conf 

http://krogh.cc/~jesper/ntp.conf

But this seems to be a "regression". Since 2.6.27.19 doesn't misbehave. 
Same NTP, same configuration, same hardware. only change is the kernel 
version. Or am I missing some parameter here?

Would it make sense to try to bisect it?

Jesper

--
Jesper
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/